Literature DB >> 35767103

Management of Locally Recurrent Retroperitoneal Sarcoma in the Adult: An Updated Consensus Approach from the Transatlantic Australasian Retroperitoneal Sarcoma Working Group.

William W Tseng1, Carol J Swallow2, Dirk C Strauss3, Sylvie Bonvalot4, Piotr Rutkowski5, Samuel J Ford6, Ricardo J Gonzalez7, Rebecca A Gladdy8, David E Gyorki9, Mark Fairweather10, Kyo Won Lee11, Markus Albertsmeier12, Winan J van Houdt13, Magalie Fau14, Carolyn Nessim15, Giovanni Grignani16, Kenneth Cardona17, Vittorio Quagliuolo18, Valerie Grignol19, Jeffrey M Farma20, Elisabetta Pennacchioli21, Marco Fiore22, Andrew Hayes3, Dimitri Tzanis4, Jacek Skoczylas5, Max L Almond6, John E Mullinax7, Wendy Johnston8, Hayden Snow9, Rick L Haas23,24, Dario Callegaro22, Myles J Smith3,25, Toufik Bouhadiba4, Anant Desai6, Rachel Voss7, Roberta Sanfilippo26,27, Robin L Jones25,28, Elizabeth H Baldini29, Andrew J Wagner30, Charles N Catton31, Silvia Stacchiotti26,27, Khin Thway32, Christina L Roland33, Chandrajit P Raut10, Alessandro Gronchi34.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS), but local recurrence is common. Biologic behavior and recurrence patterns differ significantly among histologic types of RPS, with implications for management. The Transatlantic Australasian RPS Working Group (TARPSWG) published a consensus approach to primary RPS, and to complement this, one for recurrent RPS in 2016. Since then, additional studies have been published, and collaborative discussion is ongoing to address the clinical challenges of local recurrence in RPS.
METHODS: An extensive literature search was performed, and the previous consensus statements for recurrent RPS were updated after review by TARPSWG members. The search included the most common RPS histologic types: liposarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, solitary fibrous tumor, undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma, and malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor.
RESULTS: Recurrent RPS management was evaluated from diagnosis to follow-up evaluation. For appropriately selected patients, resection is safe. Nomograms currently are available to help predict outcome after resection. These and other new findings have been combined with expert recommendations to provide 36 statements, each of which is attributed a level of evidence and grade of recommendation. In this updated document, more emphasis is placed on histologic type and clarification of the intent for surgical treatment, either curative or palliative. Overall, the fundamental tenet of optimal care for patients with recurrent RPS remains individualized treatment after multidisciplinary discussion by an experienced team with expertise in RPS.
CONCLUSIONS: Updated consensus recommendations are provided to help guide decision-making for treatment of locally recurrent RPS and better selection of patients who would potentially benefit from surgery.
© 2022. Society of Surgical Oncology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35767103     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-11864-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   4.339


  71 in total

Review 1.  Management of recurrent retroperitoneal sarcoma.

Authors:  David E Gyorki; Murray F Brennan
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2013-10-24       Impact factor: 3.454

Review 2.  Treatment of retroperitoneal sarcoma: current standards and new developments.

Authors:  Winan J van Houdt; Shane Zaidi; Christina Messiou; Khin Thway; Dirk C Strauss; Robin L Jones
Journal:  Curr Opin Oncol       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 3.645

3.  Has the Outcome for Patients Who Undergo Resection of Primary Retroperitoneal Sarcoma Changed Over Time? A Study of Time Trends During the Past 15 years.

Authors:  Dario Callegaro; Chandrajit P Raut; Deanna Ng; Dirk C Strauss; Charles Honoré; Eberhard Stoeckle; Sylvie Bonvalot; Rick L Haas; Nikolaos Vassos; Lorenzo Conti; Rebecca A Gladdy; Mark Fairweather; Winan van Houdt; Yvonne Schrage; Frits van Coevorden; Piotr Rutkowski; Rosalba Miceli; Alessandro Gronchi; Carol J Swallow
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-10-18       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 4.  Historical perspectives and future directions in the surgical management of retroperitoneal sarcoma.

Authors:  William W Tseng; Hyun Jae Seo; Raphael E Pollock; Alessandro Gronchi
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-11-11       Impact factor: 3.454

Review 5.  Did outcomes improve in retroperitoneal sarcoma surgery?

Authors:  Ferdinando Carlo Maria Cananzi; Laura Ruspi; Federico Sicoli; Eleonora Maddalena Minerva; Vittorio Quagliuolo
Journal:  Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-11-05       Impact factor: 3.279

6.  Treatment Factors Associated With Overall Survival in Retroperitoneal Sarcoma: An Institutional Review.

Authors:  Mei L Kwong; Becky Lee; Karissa Kunihira; Brian Sutjiadi; Mark E Reeves; Matthew Selleck; Gary Yang; Naveenraj Solomon
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 0.688

7.  Postoperative nomogram for survival of patients with retroperitoneal sarcoma treated with curative intent.

Authors:  D A Anaya; G Lahat; X Wang; L Xiao; P W Pisters; J N Cormier; K K Hunt; B W Feig; D C Lev; R E Pollock
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2009-07-21       Impact factor: 32.976

8.  Retroperitoneal sarcoma: a population-based analysis of epidemiology, surgery, and radiotherapy.

Authors:  Geoffrey A Porter; Nancy N Baxter; Peter W T Pisters
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2006-04-01       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcomas: patterns of recurrence in 167 patients treated at a single institution.

Authors:  Alessandro Gronchi; Paolo G Casali; Marco Fiore; Luigi Mariani; Salvatore Lo Vullo; Rossella Bertulli; Maurizio Colecchia; Laura Lozza; Patrizia Olmi; Mario Santinami; Juan Rosai
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-06-01       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  A systematic review of population-based studies examining outcomes in primary retroperitoneal sarcoma surgery.

Authors:  Oliver Peacock; Shailen Patel; Jonathan A Simpson; Catherine J Walter; David J Humes
Journal:  Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 3.279

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.